Noddings, N. (2013). Education and Democracy in the 21st Century. Teachers College Press.
B. Summary of book's argument taken as best you can from the introduction.
Nel Noddings uses John Deweys foundational work to view educations aims and curriculum for the 21st century. She raises questions about the current interest for standardization, and the search for one-best-way solutions. There seems to be a tension between the need for high standards and the need for students to "live" democracy in their schools. Noddings argues that we must find ways to preserve our commitment to democratic values while adapting to the societal changes that have occurred since Dewey wrote Democracy and Education almost a century ago. She emphasizes the development of the whole person as important for both individuals and their society. This can be done inside and outside of schools. It’s possible to include social, emotional, and ethical learning in all curricular and extracurricular activities. This can be done through a cooperative and imaginative exploration of the future with an emphasis on a caring relationship which will make educating the whole person possible (Noddings, 2013).
C.Brief description of author's background.
Nel Noddings is Lee Jacks Professor of Education, Emerita, at Stanford University. She is a past president of the National Academy of Education, the Philosophy of Education Society, and the John Dewey Society. She is the author of 19 books. She also spent 15 years as a teacher and administrator in public schools. She served as a mathematics department chairperson in New Jersey and as a director of the Laboratory Schools at the University of Chicago. At Stanford, where she received the Award for Teaching Excellence three times, she served as associate dean and acting dean for 4 years (Noddings, 2013).
D.Description of the scope your reading, e.g. what chapters, (with titles) you plan to read. How was your decision about what to read influenced by your goals concerning the book?
Areas to cover – How the pressure from democratic values informs reforms How the pressure from academic achievement informs reforms How the development of the whole person can be done inside and outside of schools (social, emotional and ethical learning in all curricular and extracurricular activities). With this knowledge, it will prove why this approach benefits our children, and society. Why this approach is valuable for poorer communities, as well as wealthy ones.
Chapter 1: The Problem of Education Through Two Lenses Chapter 2: Democracy Chapter 3: Equality Chapter 4: Aims, Goals, and Objectives Chapter 9: Educating the Whole Person Chapter 11: Critical Thinking on 21st-Century Education
E.How do you see the knowledge gained from your portion of the book contributing to the class's understanding of schools, teaching, and/or school reform?
What do our children need from education, and what does our society need? How can we teach democratic values to our children in schools without living them? It’s necessary to look at school as more than academic achievement; it’s a place where students should learn the knowledge and skills necessary to help them to navigate the world around them. The issue stands with academic achievement and the pressure between the need for high standards and the need for students to practice living in a democratic society. How has this pressure informed reforms? Where do children learn to function in a diverse society is not at school? In order to be the ingredient that keeps the democratic society strong, schools must address children’s needs in three domains of life: home and family, occupational, and civic. With this in mind, how should these needs inform reform efforts? Additionally, if these needs were addressed, would it be used the same way in wealthy and poor neighborhoods?
F. Summary of chapters:
Chapter 1: The Problem of Education Through Two Lenses
Nodding’s argues the keywords are: collaboration, dialogue, interdependence and creativity for 21st century thinking. Teachers are responsible for the emotional and physical safety, of their students and for their moral, and social growth, as well as their intellectual development. Their responsibility for student learning cannot be described in terms of test scores. Choice is fundamental in a democracy. But it can be argued that the public school, the local school that accepts all of the community’s children, acts as a cradle of democracy.
21st century thinking points Nodding argues is: Collaboration (Cooperation) should be more important than competition- emphasis on collaboration suggests an emphasis on communication in the form of dialogue, and dialogue requires both listening and speaking. If we want students to succeed both as students and as productive citizens, we must help them to master standard oral English. Learning to engage in dialogue is essential in developing the capacity to think critically. Critical thinking (Communication)-if we want students to think critically about social issues, we should provide them with some practical experience. Lastly, creativity which allows for growth and development.
Chapter 2: Democracy
Noddings believes that healthy extracurricular activities act as a cradle of democracy, an important center of practice for young citizens. Communication directed at their own democratically chosen projects may do more to increase facility in language than would more formal language instruction. We want to develop citizens who can do more than use the formal procedures of a democracy; we want citizens who respect their interdependence and can work cooperatively across groups with whom they share some values but have different central interests. Students and teachers are deprived of choices.
Chapter 3: Equality
Noddings states that children are not equal in their capacity for academic learning, and a universal, academic curriculum may increase academic differences. A richer, more varied curriculum might help students find out what they are suited to do and also to respect the differences in talent that they should be encouraged to see in their classmates. If we agree with those who want to raise standards in our high schools- so that a high school diploma “means something”- we may in effect deprive students of the credentials required for a job or continued training. What should a high school diploma mean? It should mean what it has always meant- that a graduate has satisfied the schools requirements in courses and grades. There should be no exit test. Forcing all students into a common curriculum at a high school level might put our democracy at risk. This makes it easy to rank kids top to bottom and ignore the special talents and interests. In the 21st century the most important goal is to recognize and appreciate interdependence. The schools primary task is intellectual development, and a full range of excellence. What schools can do: promote the spirit of cooperation, and they can work conscientiously to develop appreciation for social/economic realm- in the personal, occupational, and civic domains.
Chapter 4: Aims, Goals, and Objectives
Noddings argues- Goals 2000: America’s students would be first in the world in mathematics. Almost every educator knew that this goal was ridiculous. Goals should be attainable. NCLB- all students would be proficient in mathematics by 2014. Impossible goal, yet federal, state, and local government treated it as a genuine goal and instituted penalties for those schools that failed to make adequate progress towards it. Time, money, and effort wasted in trying to achieve the impossible, and the corruption induced by the fear of incurring penalties for failed to do so. The goals were impossible and it harms our system of education. Goals should be attainable, and they should be established cooperatively in the light of aims to which we are committed. Whereas aims are stated at a general and ideal level—“ thorough and efficient education” for all students—goals depend on a careful analysis o the subject to be taught, the interests and talents of students, available resources, and the social and economic needs of the larger community. Goals being the same for all students is harmful and ridiculous. Why should a budding mathematician, and machinist have the same math courses in HS? Accommodation of individual differences should characterize out educational efforts from the start, but serious planning for differences should start at about the middle school. Mistake made today- letting subject matter goals dominate all other possibilities.
What Nodding’s suggests to do: When social problem arises, we should rethink our goals. For example, obesity is very prevalent. Is it possible in science classes to put aside a lesson on levers, batteries and genetic formulas to integrate a lesson on nutrition? Stretch the disciplines from within and to increase interdisciplinary work. Construct realistic and respectable goals that require collaboration among HC faculties, employers, communities, colleges etc. Ask: What jobs will be available in the next decade? How are people best prepared for the relevant post-secondary training? How can we include goals that contribute to the large aims of citizenship and full personal life? We have ignored the construction of rich goals for the non-college bound. Too many have supposed that such goals are necessarily embedded only in the academic curriculum; the result was, caused by confusion over the meaning of intellectual. It should be possible to open up some courses to students from both academic and vocational programs- art, music, drama, and literature, for example.
Chapter 9: Educating the Whole Person
Noddings believes that it is a responsibility of educators to introduce the idea of spirit to students and to get them thinking about it. Ordinary life, considered boring by so many, can be deeply inspirited. To become sensitive to the sounds, touches, and sights that call forth a spiritual response is to live life more fully. Surely, this is what a genuine education seeks.
Noddings states that our objective in moral education is to establish an environment in which natural caring flourishes. Natural caring is a respectful way of meeting and treating one another that is maintained by inclination, not by rules. We treat one another with care because we want to do so – because we value a climate of care and trust within which to do our work. Our first task is to model caring. At the most basic level, we must do this because we do care, out behavior must be genuine reflection of our moral selves. We do not put on an act because the “kids are watching” and we relate to them as we hope they will relate to each other. Example: school principle bragged about how tough he was on his teachers because he “cared about the kids.” Nodding's warned him that his teachers might very well treat their students as he was treating them. When emphasis is on rules, accountability, assessment and penalties, we are likely to encourage self-protective conduct—behaviors that will starve off criticism and keep those I authority off our backs. In contrast, when we emphasize responsibility, we pledge ourselves to respond with care to the needs of those for whom we are responsible and to encourage them to respond with care to their peers. Accountability triggers a self-protective mechanism. Responsibility puts emphasis on the response, acknowledgement of another existence and needs.
Noddings believes that dialogue is the second component of moral education from the care perspective. Dialogue involves both talking and listening, and it is characterized by openness. The partner in dialogue is more important than the topic. If either partner shows signs of discomfort, the other will digress to provide reassurance, have a good laugh, or reminisce. Short pauses offer time for self-reflection. A teacher might see he/she is going too fast or realize language she uses is not helpful when there is pauses- break students into teams and see if a partner can explain something better than teacher can. Dialogue is intellectually stimulating, and it should enhance our relations with dialogue partners. Outcome= we hope they will learn how to engage in genuine dialogue and resist the party-line stubbornness. We want them to reject what might be called the “war model.” The main point is not to win an argument but to find the truth or a workable compromise. Dialogue is basic to critical thinking, an important aim posited for 21st century education. It is through dialogue—sometimes with ourselves—that we explore ideas, argue points, raise questions, and decide to pursue further investigation. Learning to engage in civil dialogue with others should make us less afraid to reflect on our own beliefs and actions. We make it safe for others to raise questions; we also make it safer for ourselves.
Noddings argues that teachers need to: model care and engage in dialogue to strengthen caring relations, and prove students with opportunities to practice caring. Students should be encouraged to work with partners and in small groups. A teacher should find unobtrusive ways to be sure all students have someone to work with, and she can use the group time to advance both intellectual interest and social competence.
Noddings states that confirmation is- when we help bring out the best in him or her. When a student commits an uncaring or unethical act, we respond by attributing to the actor the best possible motive consonant with reality. It is a responsibility of educators to introduce the idea of spirit to students and to get them thinking about it. Ordinary life, considered boring by so many, can be deeply inspirited. To become sensitive to the sounds, touches, and sights that call forth a spiritual response is to live life more fully. Surely, this is what a genuine education seeks.
Chapter 11: Critical Thinking on 21st-Century Education
Noddings believes that policymakers should consider the following questions: How can we provide for the variety of interests and talents of our children? When and how should their school experience be universal in order to establish a foundation for further learning? When should their educational programs diverge and in what ways? How each of the existing subjects can be guided by the aims and whether we can introduce new programs—such as vocational education—that make use of the current subjects. The language of education is very business: competition, accountability, scaling-up, rankings, effectiveness, zero-tolerance, and what works. We must choose a metaphor to guide our discussion of schools to be more like home. Words associated with home invite us to think of school as a place of safety, and support, companionship, fun, intellectual stimulation, cooperation, food plants and animals, conversation.
A. Citation for book.
Noddings, N. (2013). Education and Democracy in the 21st Century. Teachers College Press.
B. Summary of book's argument taken as best you can from the introduction.
Nel Noddings uses John Deweys foundational work to view educations aims and curriculum for the 21st century. She raises questions about the current interest for standardization, and the search for one-best-way solutions. There seems to be a tension between the need for high standards and the need for students to "live" democracy in their schools. Noddings argues that we must find ways to preserve our commitment to democratic values while adapting to the societal changes that have occurred since Dewey wrote Democracy and Education almost a century ago. She emphasizes the development of the whole person as important for both individuals and their society. This can be done inside and outside of schools. It’s possible to include social, emotional, and ethical learning in all curricular and extracurricular activities. This can be done through a cooperative and imaginative exploration of the future with an emphasis on a caring relationship which will make educating the whole person possible (Noddings, 2013).
C. Brief description of author's background.
Nel Noddings is Lee Jacks Professor of Education, Emerita, at Stanford University. She is a past president of the National Academy of Education, the Philosophy of Education Society, and the John Dewey Society. She is the author of 19 books. She also spent 15 years as a teacher and administrator in public schools. She served as a mathematics department chairperson in New Jersey and as a director of the Laboratory Schools at the University of Chicago. At Stanford, where she received the Award for Teaching Excellence three times, she served as associate dean and acting dean for 4 years (Noddings, 2013).
D. Description of the scope your reading, e.g. what chapters, (with titles) you plan to read. How was your decision about what to read influenced by your goals concerning the book?
Areas to cover –
How the pressure from democratic values informs reforms
How the pressure from academic achievement informs reforms
How the development of the whole person can be done inside and outside of schools (social, emotional and ethical learning in all curricular and extracurricular activities). With this knowledge, it will prove why this approach benefits our children, and society. Why this approach is valuable for poorer communities, as well as wealthy ones.
Chapter 1: The Problem of Education Through Two Lenses
Chapter 2: Democracy
Chapter 3: Equality
Chapter 4: Aims, Goals, and Objectives
Chapter 9: Educating the Whole Person
Chapter 11: Critical Thinking on 21st-Century Education
E. How do you see the knowledge gained from your portion of the book contributing to the class's understanding of schools, teaching, and/or school reform?
What do our children need from education, and what does our society need? How can we teach democratic values to our children in schools without living them? It’s necessary to look at school as more than academic achievement; it’s a place where students should learn the knowledge and skills necessary to help them to navigate the world around them. The issue stands with academic achievement and the pressure between the need for high standards and the need for students to practice living in a democratic society. How has this pressure informed reforms? Where do children learn to function in a diverse society is not at school? In order to be the ingredient that keeps the democratic society strong, schools must address children’s needs in three domains of life: home and family, occupational, and civic. With this in mind, how should these needs inform reform efforts? Additionally, if these needs were addressed, would it be used the same way in wealthy and poor neighborhoods?
F. Summary of chapters:
Chapter 1: The Problem of Education Through Two Lenses
Nodding’s argues the keywords are: collaboration, dialogue, interdependence and creativity for 21st century thinking. Teachers are responsible for the emotional and physical safety, of their students and for their moral, and social growth, as well as their intellectual development. Their responsibility for student learning cannot be described in terms of test scores. Choice is fundamental in a democracy. But it can be argued that the public school, the local school that accepts all of the community’s children, acts as a cradle of democracy.
21st century thinking points Nodding argues is: Collaboration (Cooperation) should be more important than competition- emphasis on collaboration suggests an emphasis on communication in the form of dialogue, and dialogue requires both listening and speaking. If we want students to succeed both as students and as productive citizens, we must help them to master standard oral English. Learning to engage in dialogue is essential in developing the capacity to think critically. Critical thinking (Communication)-if we want students to think critically about social issues, we should provide them with some practical experience. Lastly, creativity which allows for growth and development.
Chapter 2: Democracy
Noddings believes that healthy extracurricular activities act as a cradle of democracy, an important center of practice for young citizens. Communication directed at their own democratically chosen projects may do more to increase facility in language than would more formal language instruction. We want to develop citizens who can do more than use the formal procedures of a democracy; we want citizens who respect their interdependence and can work cooperatively across groups with whom they share some values but have different central interests. Students and teachers are deprived of choices.
Chapter 3: Equality
Noddings states that children are not equal in their capacity for academic learning, and a universal, academic curriculum may increase academic differences. A richer, more varied curriculum might help students find out what they are suited to do and also to respect the differences in talent that they should be encouraged to see in their classmates. If we agree with those who want to raise standards in our high schools- so that a high school diploma “means something”- we may in effect deprive students of the credentials required for a job or continued training. What should a high school diploma mean? It should mean what it has always meant- that a graduate has satisfied the schools requirements in courses and grades. There should be no exit test. Forcing all students into a common curriculum at a high school level might put our democracy at risk. This makes it easy to rank kids top to bottom and ignore the special talents and interests.
In the 21st century the most important goal is to recognize and appreciate interdependence. The schools primary task is intellectual development, and a full range of excellence. What schools can do: promote the spirit of cooperation, and they can work conscientiously to develop appreciation for social/economic realm- in the personal, occupational, and civic domains.
Chapter 4: Aims, Goals, and Objectives
Noddings argues- Goals 2000: America’s students would be first in the world in mathematics. Almost every educator knew that this goal was ridiculous. Goals should be attainable. NCLB- all students would be proficient in mathematics by 2014. Impossible goal, yet federal, state, and local government treated it as a genuine goal and instituted penalties for those schools that failed to make adequate progress towards it. Time, money, and effort wasted in trying to achieve the impossible, and the corruption induced by the fear of incurring penalties for failed to do so. The goals were impossible and it harms our system of education. Goals should be attainable, and they should be established cooperatively in the light of aims to which we are committed. Whereas aims are stated at a general and ideal level—“ thorough and efficient education” for all students—goals depend on a careful analysis o the subject to be taught, the interests and talents of students, available resources, and the social and economic needs of the larger community. Goals being the same for all students is harmful and ridiculous. Why should a budding mathematician, and machinist have the same math courses in HS? Accommodation of individual differences should characterize out educational efforts from the start, but serious planning for differences should start at about the middle school. Mistake made today- letting subject matter goals dominate all other possibilities.
What Nodding’s suggests to do: When social problem arises, we should rethink our goals. For example, obesity is very prevalent. Is it possible in science classes to put aside a lesson on levers, batteries and genetic formulas to integrate a lesson on nutrition? Stretch the disciplines from within and to increase interdisciplinary work. Construct realistic and respectable goals that require collaboration among HC faculties, employers, communities, colleges etc. Ask: What jobs will be available in the next decade? How are people best prepared for the relevant post-secondary training? How can we include goals that contribute to the large aims of citizenship and full personal life? We have ignored the construction of rich goals for the non-college bound. Too many have supposed that such goals are necessarily embedded only in the academic curriculum; the result was, caused by confusion over the meaning of intellectual. It should be possible to open up some courses to students from both academic and vocational programs- art, music, drama, and literature, for example.
Chapter 9: Educating the Whole Person
Noddings believes that it is a responsibility of educators to introduce the idea of spirit to students and to get them thinking about it. Ordinary life, considered boring by so many, can be deeply inspirited. To become sensitive to the sounds, touches, and sights that call forth a spiritual response is to live life more fully. Surely, this is what a genuine education seeks.
Noddings states that our objective in moral education is to establish an environment in which natural caring flourishes. Natural caring is a respectful way of meeting and treating one another that is maintained by inclination, not by rules. We treat one another with care because we want to do so – because we value a climate of care and trust within which to do our work. Our first task is to model caring. At the most basic level, we must do this because we do care, out behavior must be genuine reflection of our moral selves. We do not put on an act because the “kids are watching” and we relate to them as we hope they will relate to each other. Example: school principle bragged about how tough he was on his teachers because he “cared about the kids.” Nodding's warned him that his teachers might very well treat their students as he was treating them. When emphasis is on rules, accountability, assessment and penalties, we are likely to encourage self-protective conduct—behaviors that will starve off criticism and keep those I authority off our backs. In contrast, when we emphasize responsibility, we pledge ourselves to respond with care to the needs of those for whom we are responsible and to encourage them to respond with care to their peers. Accountability triggers a self-protective mechanism. Responsibility puts emphasis on the response, acknowledgement of another existence and needs.
Noddings believes that dialogue is the second component of moral education from the care perspective. Dialogue involves both talking and listening, and it is characterized by openness. The partner in dialogue is more important than the topic. If either partner shows signs of discomfort, the other will digress to provide reassurance, have a good laugh, or reminisce. Short pauses offer time for self-reflection. A teacher might see he/she is going too fast or realize language she uses is not helpful when there is pauses- break students into teams and see if a partner can explain something better than teacher can. Dialogue is intellectually stimulating, and it should enhance our relations with dialogue partners. Outcome= we hope they will learn how to engage in genuine dialogue and resist the party-line stubbornness. We want them to reject what might be called the “war model.” The main point is not to win an argument but to find the truth or a workable compromise. Dialogue is basic to critical thinking, an important aim posited for 21st century education. It is through dialogue—sometimes with ourselves—that we explore ideas, argue points, raise questions, and decide to pursue further investigation. Learning to engage in civil dialogue with others should make us less afraid to reflect on our own beliefs and actions. We make it safe for others to raise questions; we also make it safer for ourselves.
Noddings argues that teachers need to: model care and engage in dialogue to strengthen caring relations, and prove students with opportunities to practice caring. Students should be encouraged to work with partners and in small groups. A teacher should find unobtrusive ways to be sure all students have someone to work with, and she can use the group time to advance both intellectual interest and social competence.
Noddings states that confirmation is- when we help bring out the best in him or her. When a student commits an uncaring or unethical act, we respond by attributing to the actor the best possible motive consonant with reality. It is a responsibility of educators to introduce the idea of spirit to students and to get them thinking about it. Ordinary life, considered boring by so many, can be deeply inspirited. To become sensitive to the sounds, touches, and sights that call forth a spiritual response is to live life more fully. Surely, this is what a genuine education seeks.
Chapter 11: Critical Thinking on 21st-Century Education
Noddings believes that policymakers should consider the following questions: How can we provide for the variety of interests and talents of our children? When and how should their school experience be universal in order to establish a foundation for further learning? When should their educational programs diverge and in what ways? How each of the existing subjects can be guided by the aims and whether we can introduce new programs—such as vocational education—that make use of the current subjects. The language of education is very business: competition, accountability, scaling-up, rankings, effectiveness, zero-tolerance, and what works. We must choose a metaphor to guide our discussion of schools to be more like home. Words associated with home invite us to think of school as a place of safety, and support, companionship, fun, intellectual stimulation, cooperation, food plants and animals, conversation.
Additional Resources:
The Educational Theory of Nel NoddingsWhat Does It Mean to Educate the Whole Child?
Nel Noddings, the ethics of care and education
A Morally Defensible Mission for Schools in the 21st Century